The watch metaphor, LDG, represents the complex nature of the universe. Watches are very complicated little machines. They have intricate parts that work together perfectly. The universe is the same way, so people often use the "watchmaker" argument to say that since an object as complicated as a watch cannot come about by chance (even though, technically, it can), something even more complicated (such as the universe) must have a maker.

Or something like that. It's not really the best metaphor, especially when you consider that watches contain parts not naturally found. And how exactly does nature cleave quartz crystals into small enough slivers?

quote:

We can’t prove if god exists or doesn’t exist, so the question is which idea fits best with what we know. To use a well known example if you find a watch you could not prove the existence or non existence of a creator for the watch. However you could look at the watch make observation on it and then come to the conclusion that the watch did indeed have a creator.

Could help but to comment as to the "watch" metaphor for the argument on creation...

Sounds like something, someone else said not too long ago as well....

*ponders*

LDG, I was curious to know if you knew the many meanings of the "peace" sign on your avatar. Did you know that it could also mean the cross where Jesus died(upside down and with the arms broken)? I'm only curious on that.

Quick question why a watch? Out of everything that someone has made why a watch?

quote:

But when envoys were sent by the rulers of Babylon to ask him about the miraculous sign that had occurred in the land, God left him to test him and to know everything that was in his heart.

But that quote doesnt tell us to test things at all; all it does is tell us that God may leave us to test us, not we to test him.

quote:

How does reading the bible as a religious text discredit it?

I think you misread my senetence, or perhaps my grammar was unclear. I meant that I may accept that the Bible contains spiritual truth, as do all religious books equally, but gives us no accurate scientific or historical information.

quote:

So would I.

If everyone thinks that the watch and the universe are different, theny why persist using it as an anology. Hume suggested using a carrot instead.

quote:

Ignorant of what? If we liken your watch to the universe, would you say that someone who looks at it and doesn't see a designer is just as ignorant?

I guess we're all just a bunch of dumb fucks.
On the other hand you could argue that absolutely everything in the bible if put in another context(a novel for example) would belong to the category of pure fantasy. And not very good fantasy for that matter.

quote:

In that case the person is either very ignorant, or very dumb.

Ignorant of what? If we liken your watch to the universe, would you say that someone who looks at it and doesn't see a designer is just as ignorant?

quote:

Not everyone who looks at a watch will assume it was created by an intelligent being.

In that case the person is either very ignorant, or very dumb.

quote:

I'd also say that watches and universes are quite a bit different.

So would I.

quote:

However you could look at the watch make observation on it and then come to the conclusion that the watch did indeed have a creator.

humans simply have brains too small and underdeveloped to understand the universe and all of its complexities. Just as a dog cannot understand algebra, man cannot understand the universe. And humans have always sought answers to questions they cannot answer, the Egyptians thought Ra dragged the sun across the sky each day, Christians believe god created the Earth, athiests believe only what can be proven.

So who are the stupid ones?

quote:

However you could look at the watch make observation on it and then come to the conclusion that the watch did indeed have a creator.

That is not always true, though. Not everyone who looks at a watch will assume it was created by an intelligent being.

I'd also say that watches and universes are quite a bit different.

quote:

Nephilem, we can't test God's existance. That's completely a matter of faith. We don't have evidence of God's existance, same as I don't have evidence of it's non-existance.

We can’t prove if god exists or doesn’t exist, so the question is which idea fits best with what we know. To use a well known example if you find a watch you could not prove the existence or non existence of a creator for the watch. However you could look at the watch make observation on it and then come to the conclusion that the watch did indeed have a creator.

quote:

Where does it tell them to investigate thier faith?

The bible tells us to test everything here is one verse though I know there are more.

quote:

2 Chronicles 32:31 (New International Version)
31 But when envoys were sent by the rulers of Babylon to ask him about the miraculous sign that had occurred in the land, God left him to test him and to know everything that was in his heart.

quote:

If by discrediting it, you mean reading it not as a historical or scientific text but as a religious one, then yes.

How does reading the bible as a religious text discredit it?

quote:

Islam tells its followers that they can’t test their religion Christianity makes no such claim. The Bible actually tells Christians to test everything,

Where does it tell them to investigate thier faith? Surely Chrisitian faith is set in the same way that Islam is; 'I am the Lord thy God', 'All Praise is Allah, the Lord of the Worlds'. Similarity? I think so.

I also enjoy this verse, 'The Jews say: "The Christians are not on the right track," and the Christians say: "It is the Jews who are not on the right track," yet both read their Holy Books (Torah or Gospel). And those who have no knowledge (the pagan Arabs) say like to what both of them say; so Allah will judge between them in their dispute on the Day of Judgment.[113] 2:[113]'

I also enjoyed Nephilem's 'JTB' attempt. Unfortunatly, this backfires. Whereas knowing the earth is round can be called knowledge because it fulfills the JTB, knowing God's existence cannot. It may not be true and there is not significant justification.

quote:

Has some one succeeded in discrediting the bible?

If by discrediting it, you mean reading it not as a historical or scientific text but as a religious one, then yes.

Nephilem, we can't test God's existance. That's completely a matter of faith. We don't have evidence of God's existance, same as I don't have evidence of it's non-existance.

You can sail around the world and never come to an edge. But you can read the Bible all you want and not see how it's evidence.

quote:

don't see how that makes any difference as the doctrine your allowed to question is completely false.

That’s making the assumption that the book we are testing is completely false. The reason that we test ideas is to see if they should be followed or not. So what has testing of the bible shown us. Has some one succeeded in discrediting the bible?

Now for those of you who say that it is completely a matter of faith not evidence I have an example for you albeit extreme. Lest say that I refused to believe that the earth was round, but instead said that it was flat. This would be an issue of beliefs but evidence, what is the earth really like would definitely come in to play. That is essentially what I am saying in the case of the bible is the lake of faith in the bible Justified.

quote:

NO! NO! NO! Islam tells its followers that they can’t test their religion, Christianity makes no such claim. The Bible actually tells Christians to test everything, and Christians can look at religion threw a critical stance, although many of them don’t.

I don't see how that makes any difference as the doctrine your allowed to question is completely false.

quote:

sides actually having proof for a religion would (in the case of the judeic and judeic descendant faiths, ie Islam and christianity) negate that religion as it's founding pillar in all three cases is utter faith in the almighty creator and faith with proof is no faith at all that's just knowing

NO! NO! NO! Islam tells its followers that they can’t test their religion, Christianity makes no such claim. The Bible actually tells Christians to test everything, and Christians can look at religion threw a critical stance, although many of them don’t.

quote:

Shade nothing is ever going to change on this board I have a feeling.

Good to see you're finally catching on, Sherlock. Welcome to YN/The Real World.

quote:

There has been proof about half a dozen times just look back no one feels like going into it again.

circumstantial tall tales and ravings from random men in the desert aren't proof

sides actually having proof for a religion would (in the case of the judeic and judeic descendant faiths, ie Islam and christianity) negate that religion as it's founding pillar in all three cases is utter faith in the almighty creator and faith with proof is no faith at all that's just knowing

The truth is, you'll never come to a consensus (I've said this many times before).

But let me tell you my opinion, and yes I've said it before on this thread.

I tried the whole God thing, did everything in my power to "further his kingdom" and, in return he gave me fuck all, so I've decided not to follow God, but to instead live my life the way I see fit.